Furnace construction



' Deg, 9, 1924.

C. N. MORGAN ET AL FURNACE CONSTRUCTION Filed May 18, 1923 50f W. 0 0mmw% VLNZ 7 43/ fir MM 4 Patented Dec. 9, 1924.

UNITED STATES PATfZ'l FFICE.

CHARLES N. MORGAN, OF ALBANY, AND ANDREW L. KEELER, 0F TROY, NEW YORK.

FURNACE CONSTRUCTION.

Application filed May 18, 1923. Serial No. 639,885.

To all whom it may concern Be it known that we, CHARLES N. Mon- GAN andANDREW L. KEELER, citizens of the United States, and residing,respectively, at Albany, in the county of Albany, State of New York, andTroy, in the county of Rensselaer, State of New York, have invented newand useful Improvements in Furnace Construction, of which the followingis a specification.

Our invention relates to furnaces and more particularly to theconstruction of renewable fire walls and refractory linings therefor.

Its object is to provide an improved construction for furnace wallswhich are subjected to the influence of destructive heat wherein theportion which is directly exposed to the fire is readily renewable,either as a whole, without removing the inner portions of the wall, or,in which a disintegrated part of the exposed surface may be renewedwithout disturbing other parts, either of the exposed surface or theinner wall.

Another object is to provide a renewable lining in which all portions ofany facing unit or block will be heated to substantially the sametemperature and which may expand uniformly, thus preventing, thedevelopment of stresses tending to spall or crack the blocks.

A further object is to provide a renewable lining having a minimumnumber of exposed joints and which comprises but a small volumetricportion of the entire wall, thus reducing an element of weakness andeffecting a large saving of block in repairing and rebuilding.

We accomplish these and other objects and advantages, which will appearas the description proceeds, by using a veneering of flat slabs orblocks arranged to present their sides of greatest area to the fire, andheld in place by a system of supporting and retaining headers.

In the drawing- Fig. 1 isa perspective view of our wall partly incross-section and constructed from our preferred form of block.

Fig. 2 is similar to Fig. 1 but illustrates a construction using adifierent form of block.

Fig. 3 is a perspective view of the preferred form of locking header.

Fig. 4: is a perspective view of a facing block which inter-fits with aheader as shown in Fig. 1.

Fig. 5 is a perspective view of an intermediate facing block in itspreferred form.

Fig. 6 is a perspective view of a modified form of header.

Figs. 7 and 8 are perspective views of blocks similar to those shown inFigs. 1 and 5, respectively, but provided with a modified form ofinterfitting means.

Referring to Figs. 1, 3, 1 and 5, 1 represents the ordinary wallstructure or backing of non-refractory material. Embedded in thisportion of the wall, at substantially equal intervals, are the permanentheaders, 2, ofrefractory material which support, in sections, the innerhalf of the refractory wall comprising the blocks, 3, laid flush withthe outer ends of the headers, 2. Open spaces are left in this innerhalf wall, immediately beneath alternate headers, to receive the lockingheaders, 42, of the outer half wall. These headers, except at the topand bottom of the wall, are arranged in pairs to facilitate the removalof sections of the wall. In their preferred form, these headers are madeequal in length to the blocks, 7, and each has a vertically projectinglip, 5, on one side which interfits with a corresponding recess, 6, inthe block, 7, above or below as the case may be, and holds the block, 7,securely in place in the face of the wall. Between each set of headers,4, we prefer to arrange three horizontal courses comprising the blocks,'6', adjacent the headers, and a course of blocks, 8, intermediate theblocks, 7. In the preferred type of construction, the blocks, 8, haveplane upper and lower surfaces, 9, but may be provided at one end with atongue, 10, and at the other end with a groove, 11, so that horizontallyadjacent stones are locked in place.

In Fig. 2, the arrangement of the various units is identical with thearrangement in Fig. 1, but the headers, 18, are provided with a tongue,12, adapted to fit in a groove, 13, in the unit, 14; and the units, 15,are provided with grooves, 16, at the top and bottom, to receive thetongues, 17, of the units, 1 1.

It will be apparent from a consideration of Figs. 1 and 2, that we haveprovided a refractory wall in which every unit exposed to the fire maybe readily replaced without removing any of the inner portions of thewall. Further, by dividing the exposed face horizontally into relativelysmall sections and-supporting each section upon a row of headersentirely independent of the wall below, it is possible to remove andreplace any of these sections without disturbing the Wall above. By thussupporting the wall, it is obvious that the vertical load upon a unit atthe bottom of the wall is not substantially greater than that on a unitat the top or at any position intermediate the top and bottom. Hence,each section may expand more or less freely under temperature changes.By arranging our facing units with their sides of greatest area exposedto the fire we not only reduce the number of units required to cover agiven surface but we thus make the exposed portion of the Wallcomparatively thin so that each unit thereof is heated uniformlythroughout and is not subjected to distortive stresses due to unequaltemperatures. Furthermore, by making our facing units of comparativelylarge but thin blocks set in this manner, we greatly reduce the numberof joints exposed to the fire. We regard this as a feature ofconsiderable practical importance for it is well known that the jointsin a fire wall of this character are a potential source of trouble andit is here that destructive disintegration begins.

Another advantage which we attain in our wall, and which will be obviousfrom a consideration of Fig. 1, is that any header, 4, may be withdrawnwithout disturbing the parts of the wall above, which will be supportedupon the headers horizontally adjacent to the removed header and, havingremoved a lower header, the adjacent stretchers below may be removed andreplaced without disturbing any other unit. This construction permits. asubstantial portion of the wall, whether it be at the top or bottom ofan independently supported section, to be removed without disturbingother portions of the wall.

While we have illustrated and described a composite wall in which theinner and outer refractory sections are substantially equal inthickness, it is obvious that this ratio, while practical andeconomical, is not essential, and we therefore do not wish to limitourselves to this or other details of construction which may be changedwithout departing from the scope and spirit of our invention.

We claim- 1. A veneer facing for a fire wall comprising refractory unitsinterlocking in position on said wall and presenting their sides ofgreatest area to the fire, and headers slidably removable from said walland provided with means for locking said facing against said wall.

2. A refractory facing for a lire wall comprising header and stretcherunits of equal length to break joints throughout, said headers beingarranged in vertically spaced dou ble rows and any header being slidablyremovable from said wall independently of adjacent headers, whereby aportion of said wall below a row of headers may be removed and re lacedby withdrawing a single header ad acent thereto.

In a furnace wall construction the com bination of a pair of headershaving plane faces in contact and projecting lips on the opposite facesadapted to engage and retain adjacent blocks in said wall.

4t. In a furnace wall construction the combination of a pair of headersslidably separable along plane faces of intimate contact and providedwith vertically projecting portions at their outer edges for retainingadjacent blocks in place in said wall.

5. In a furnace construction, the combination with an inner wall, of aveneer facing therefor comprising blocks laid with their sides ofgreatest area to the fire and headers slidably removable from said wallengaging said blocks and retaining them against said wall.

6. A veneer facing for a fire wall comprising interfitting refractoryslabs laid on edge, and a row of headers intermediate the top and bottomof the wall forming an independent support for a section of the facingabove; said row of headers being divided to form upper and lower unitsprovided with means interfitting the adjacent slabs of said facing forlocking the same against the wall.

7. In a furnace construction a refractory wall structure comprising aninner portion including means for supporting said portion in independentsections, and an outer facing supported in independent sections; saidfacing including slidably removable headers provided with means forlocking said facing in position against the inner portion of the wall.

8. In a furnace construction, a refractory lining comprising unitspresenting their sides of greatest area to the fire whereby the numberof joints is minimized and the units are heated to substantially thesame temperature throughout; and spaced rows of slidably removableheaders supporting said lining in independent sections and provided withmeans interfitting the units adjacent said headers for preserving theintegrity of said lining.

9. In a furnace construction, a refractory lining comprising incombination an inner refractory portion having a plane outer face, anouter refractory portion comprising units presenting their sides ofgreatest terniediate the top and bottom of the wall area to the fire andhaving their opposite being divided and freely separable along :1 sidesin the plane of the face of the inner horizontal plane and provided attheir outer 10 portion, and vertically spaced rows of headedges withmeans interfitting the adjacent ers carried by the inner portion forsupportunits *or retaining said units in place.

ing the outer portion in sections independ- CHARLES N. MORGAN. ent ofeach other; each row of headers in- ANDREW L. KEELER.

